Closed GoogleCodeExporter closed 9 years ago
Sorry, it's not a bug. Please, correct it as a Feature.
Original comment by mishoboss
on 11 May 2011 at 7:08
Original comment by kai.openhab
on 11 May 2011 at 7:17
Is there a chance this one is ready for version 1.0?
Original comment by mishoboss
on 17 Feb 2012 at 6:11
Thomas volunteered to look into it :-)
@Mihail: Do you have any hint on how to best test it? Any real hardware or some
software tool for the other communication end?
Original comment by kai.openhab
on 18 Feb 2012 at 9:06
Kai, just for tests Thomas could use NetCat for Linux/Unix. With the real
existing hardware it is more complicated, because usually there is some
application layer protocol above the TCP/IP or UDP/IP stack. In theory it
should be able to communicate with any 6loWPAN device. In practice, you should
know the application protocol of the device (there is no standardized 6loWPAN
application protocol yet, despite there are several drafts and proposals) to do
some real world stuff.
Personally I want to use TCP or UDP communication with my custom build Arduino
based hardware. Currently it speaks to the openHAB via the REST API and openHAB
speaks to it via the HTTP binding, but there are several issues whit that:
1. Atmega 328 MCU has too small memory to hold long URLs and do string
manipulation.
2. You have to hard-code the item URIs in the firmware.
So, personally I see this TCP/UDP binding as an open road to the DIY hardware
with custom ASCII based protocols. In some time of the future I see it as a
transport layer for different protocols like 6loWPAN, xPL, and why not a whole
protocol framework, built-in in openHAB, that let the users describe their own
protocol schemes.
Original comment by mishoboss
on 18 Feb 2012 at 10:29
i´m also interested on it, how ist the status with tcp binding, i would like
to use may be an special protocol on it. i´d like to know where to start ...
Original comment by openhab.lb
on 6 Mar 2012 at 8:19
Regarding "special protocol", the same as
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/openhab/Sy-QC16hX8c/oTwmSQo6y8YJ might be the
case for this binding.
Original comment by kai.openhab
on 6 Mar 2012 at 8:26
there are two things:
- the protocol
- the transport (transport framework)
as i can see, the some protocol (how the bytes are interpreted) could be used
for tcp and/or serial binding ... at the moment i´m interested to get the
bytes transported by an tcpip connection to openhab translated there and
updated items
Original comment by openhab.lb
on 7 Mar 2012 at 11:49
I have some Advantech 6015 analog modules in my network that monitor PT1000
probes, and send the temperature data via UDP packets every 30 seconds. Each
packet contains an array with 8 sets [current, max, min].
In Misterhouse, I process these with simple actions:
$advantech_LBK = new Socket_Item(undef, undef, "server_advantech_LBK");
$T_supply = new Generic_Item;
$T_cool = new Generic_Item;
$T_return = new Generic_Item;
$T_duct = new Generic_Item;
if (my $packet = said $advantech_LBK) {
my ($id, @curtemp, @maxtemp, @mintemp);
($id, @curtemp[0..8], @maxtemp[0..8], @mintemp[0..8]) =
unpack("a4x18n9n9n9", $packet);
# Ni1000 sensor measured as PT1000 -40 - 160 C; 17% too high.
set $T_supply sprintf("%2.1f", (@curtemp[0]/326.68-40)/1.17) unless @curtemp[0]==65535;
# PT1000 -40 - 160 C
set $T_cool sprintf("%2.1f", @curtemp[1]/326.68-40) unless @curtemp[1]==65535;
set $T_return sprintf("%2.1f", @curtemp[2]/326.68-40) unless @curtemp[2]==65535;
set $T_duct sprintf("%2.1f", @curtemp[3]/326.68-40) unless @curtemp[3]==65535;
}
Would it be possible to support a similarly simple parsing of the packet, e.g.
in a rule, with packet attributes like srp ip, src host and src port that we
can use in a when cause?
Original comment by vanhobo...@gmail.com
on 9 Apr 2012 at 5:23
Will be easy actual binding implementation on top of the new abtract class that
I have built. TCP only as this point in time, but adaption to UDP not that
difficult
Original comment by karel.go...@gmail.com
on 25 May 2012 at 1:31
done!
Original comment by karel.go...@gmail.com
on 2 Sep 2012 at 6:54
Wait, we still didn't review the code... It is only done as soon as it is in
the main branch, not in a feature branch :-)
Original comment by kai.openhab
on 2 Sep 2012 at 6:58
Original comment by kai.openhab
on 2 Sep 2012 at 6:58
This binding has meanwhile been moved to the default branch.
Original comment by kai.openhab
on 15 Nov 2012 at 11:51
Original issue reported on code.google.com by
mishoboss
on 11 May 2011 at 7:07